Proposal Aims to Hold Government Accountable by Ending Qualified Immunity
A group in Ohio is making its third attempt to gain approval for a proposed constitutional amendment that would put an end to qualified immunity for government employees. This includes public university administrators, prosecutors, and police officers. Currently, qualified immunity provides protection to government employees from civil suits, unless it can be proven that their actions were unconstitutional.
The Ohio Coalition to End Qualified Immunity is confident that their proposed language will be successful this time around. Kyle Pierce, the executive director of the coalition, clarified that their intention is not to target the police, but rather to ensure a government that is accountable for its actions. Pierce stated, In Ohio, we back our boys in blue. We’re not out here to attack our officers; we’re out here to have a government that’s accountable. The government is the target in this.
Opponents of the amendment argue that it will hinder the ability of police officers to perform their duties and make quick decisions in the field. They believe that stripping away this protection from officers would have negative consequences. Frank LaRose, the Ohio Secretary of State and a Republican candidate for the US Senate, expressed his opposition to the amendment, stating that it would be an ugly thing if successful.
The goal of the coalition is to have the amendment included on the ballot for the General Election in November 2024. By doing so, they aim to give voters a chance to decide whether qualified immunity should come to an end for government employees. This significant step would help ensure accountability within the government and provide a mechanism for individuals to seek justice if their constitutional rights are violated.
It remains to be seen how this proposal will unfold and whether it will gain the necessary support to appear on the ballot. The debate surrounding qualified immunity is complex, with valid arguments on both sides. Supporters argue that it is a vital protection for government employees who often face challenging and high-pressure situations. Conversely, opponents believe that accountability and justice should prevail, and individuals should have the right to seek legal recourse when their constitutional rights are violated.
The proposed amendment in Ohio is part of a broader national conversation about qualified immunity and the role it plays in our legal system. As similar proposals emerge in other states, it will be interesting to observe the outcome of these initiatives and their potential impact on government accountability.
It is clear that this issue is far from settled. Policymakers, activists, and citizens will continue to engage in discussions and debates surrounding qualified immunity, examining its benefits and drawbacks. Ultimately, the fate of these proposals will rest with the voters who will have the opportunity to voice their opinions and shape the future of government accountability.
